Scottest

Alan gave me much-valued direction when I produced a set of drawings for the pre-grouping S&C work of the LSWR. I have to presume the published information, and the associated SWC drawings were correct, as no-one has sought to challenge them. I believe they are still available from the Circle. PB

I had the pleasure and privilege of being a RAF colleague of Mike in the very early 70s at RAF Lyneham. Not only was his modelling skill valued, he was a very fine, well respected aircraft (propulsion) technician, at that time on the C130. Mike was very proud of the fact that he had been a Boy Entrant at a time when the Service valued such. My Memsahib and I were often made welcome at Cricklade,and our Christmas thoughts are with Hilary, and family. PB

Oh dear, I could so easily downgrade this, until now, useful thread to yet another wishlist.

The above may be of value to help understand some pre-grouping challenges.

In the course of time, I became the pleased possessor of some half doz of these. I had to hard wire the earliest purchases with mixed results, but I was right to attribute that to my own limited dexterity. Eventually I bought two of the Modelzone limited edition in sunshine/black and fitted TCS decoders. The end result was more than satisfactory. I had originally expected to renumber the duplicates but in the event that did not happen. No matter, as 1860 they both lived up to my wishes. PB

Very nice, very nice indeed. PB PS I, for one, would appreciate more pictures of this ilk

My thanks yet again to the Poll Team, (one of whom I know from way, way back), for providing an opportunity to keep a good finger on the pulse of opinion. As one who is now very limited by a variant of Parkinsons (CBD or Parkinsons Plus) , and can only lurk in the background, I value this column very much. Be well each, PB

I have oft found myself puzzled by the apparent lack of serious r-t-r support for the railways of the IoW. (I selected those words with scrupulous care). One reason, I believe valid, is the lack of standardization of the rolling stock. Why bemoan a shortcoming of r-t-r locos, when there is even less choice for appropriate coaches. And so, little gets done. As it happens, circumstances have caused me to dispose of most of my hardware, and leave me an observer on the fringe of the hobby. So even if this new initiative should eventually lead to high quality support for the trains of the IoW, I doubt that my support could follow. However, I can still wish, and in my minds eye, at least, re create the vista once regularly available to a trainspotter at Newport station.

Some 20-25 years ago, I attempted to bridge this gap in respect of pre-grouping ex-LSWR S&C. After detailed research I produced a number of dimensioned drawings, accompanied by drawing office information, and published them by courtesy of the SWC. I invited expert criticism and correction! It's still on record should anyone need it, though my memories have since been damaged by Parkinsons Disease.

With apologies for the poor quality reproduction, but the attached contemporary data may be of interest if not of much value!

"Unwise, to carp and criticise" Mr Gilbert's libretto is still appropriate even after a century or more. My first photo shows how "standard" aspects of turnouts were never standard in real life. in my second photo, it can be seen that for the early part of its life, the detail of turnouts was largely covered with ballast. Finally, I have attempted to show that the alignment of timbers (not sleepers) was always subject to individual circumstances. Details of LSW turnouts is covered as best I could in a series of drawings produced for the SWC some years back. I say "as best I could" deliberately. As yet, no one has proved these drawings to be wrong. Scottest

This talk of getting laid could so easily go wrong........

I had almost forgotten how to include jpgs to a forum contribution. It might be timely to promote the existence of a number of drawings for pre-grouping LSW S&C, published by the South Western Circle, and against which these new products from Mr Peco might be compared. The Peco product would appear to be for the post-grouping REA standard, whereas the pre-grouping product had a number of small differences. However, for 4ft 1-1/2" gauge, Rule 1 still suits me.

I continue to lurk with full interest. If I were an active participant I should be delighted to start a new BLT of LSWR parentage, and use these new products from Mr Peco. Just a small issue. There were differences in timbering between LSW pre-grouping and Southern's REA geometry, as were the rail lengths, but the use of Rule One has never bothered me.